I recently posted an image that I made in an interesting thread about old windows in old, abandoned buildings. That thread is here...http://www.openphotographyforums.com...ead.php?t=8528
My image was created first by running three bracketed exposures through Photomatix and generating an HDR composite. I then took the HDR through Photoshop CS4 and converted it to the B&W seen in that other thread. I am not too good at post processing. It is one of my bigger weaknesses and I really think I could do a lot more with my photos that would in the end, make them better. This challenge is just to give those that want to try, access to the original files so you can work on them and come up with your own black and white version of the window and hopefully teach me something in the process.

I have uploaded 4 files to choose from. The first three are NEF files from my Nikon D200 that were bracketed with the intention of making the HDR with Photomatix. They were shot with -1, 0, +1 EV. You can download them all if you want to try another HDR or some other type of blend, or just one or two or even none if you are not interested. You can also download the 4th file which is the HDR that I got from Photomatix. It is straight out of the program and normally I would then take that image into Photoshop for some more adjustments. Do that if you want.

This is more a learning experience for me because if you do try your hand at it, I would hope that you would also give a description of what you did to end up with your final results. That way I can see the different ways people tackle similar situations along with their results. Who knows, maybe it will be a learning experience for some others as well and fun for a few others anyway.

As I said, these are Nikon NEF files which Asher wanted me to inform you that you can convert via Adobe DNG convertor if you have an older version of Photoshop.

Here's my go at it, but full disclosure is I'm processing it on my laptop while watching the kids, so maybe not my best effort ;-)

First thing I note is of your 3 nef exposures, the one you have marked as under 1 is actually the "proper" exposure from a conversion standpoint -- meaning it has the broadest range of exposure data.

Second thing is I am not a huge fan of "HDR" processing as I find similar results can be achieved much of the time with proper raw conversion on a properly exposed file. (This is one of the more popular processing technique tidbits we teach on our workshops.)

Next, I see the strength of your image in the juxtaposition of the black window frame adjacent to the partially blown reflecting glass panes; then the surrounding plants serve as framing for those key elements. (Note: I might have possibly chosen a slightly different framing to begin with, maybe backed up a bit to include a bit more room above the window and a bit more to the right, but I was not there to say that really would be better -- and we are of course working with what you gave us. I just mention it in case you return for a redux ;-) )

Anyway, that said, this file was processed to B&W as it appears almost entirely in C1 using only your '-1' nef. This required use of many of C1's adjustment tools. First and foremost for a B&W conversion is ironically to get the color balance correct -- without that, it is difficult to get a believable tonal range -- and for whatever reason your nef was several points too warm to render good tonality in the greens. I also applied the C1 portrait profile for your camera as it generally renders a bit more total DR than the standard profile and then chose C1's built in high contrast B&W conversion profile. Working from this base, I adjusted global contrast and overall brightness down, increased gamma, and increased local contrast. At that point, what I had is essentially what you see below and exported it as 16-bit RGB tiff. I then opened it in CS4 where I used the transform tool to correct some of the bothersome (at least to me) skew -- which additionally requires a slight crop -- added a bit of output sharpening and used my basic web action for creating the 900 pixel wide jpeg conversion you see here.

PS: I would add that I find Nikon files much more friendly to B&W conversion than I do Canon files. So much so in fact, that if I ever do need to return to a DSLR, the next one will likely be a Nikon...

Cheers,

Asher Kelman

March 14th, 2009 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_Flesher
(Post 71940)

Here's my go at it, but full disclosure is I'm processing it on my laptop while watching the kids, so maybe not my best effort ;-)

Anyway, that said, this file was processed to B&W as it appears almost entirely in C1 using only your '-1' nef. This required use of many of C1's adjustment tools. First and foremost for a B&W conversion is ironically to get the color balance correct -- without that, it is difficult to get a believable tonal range -- and for whatever reason your nef was several points too warm to render good tonality in the greens. I also applied the C1 portrait profile for your camera as it generally renders a bit more total DR than the standard profile and then chose C1's built in high contrast B&W conversion profile.............

As you can see whereas you aced the reality of the leaves, (and so much so that I can imagine if gently touched, they'd push back), but James' image has the interior nicely suggested and reflections in the window too. So your methodology using the other 2 NEF layers in PS as well, for selective masking, likely would do even better!

Asher

Jack_Flesher

March 14th, 2009 03:21 PM

Asher,

I hear (or rather see) your point ;-) But if you look closely at mine, the interior bricks are still visible (even on my laptop) -- albeit barely, but that was by choice -- and frankly, I left enough of the original material in the reflection pane to keep it interesting as a main subject, yet it's bright enough with just enough clip to be "believable" as a reflection. I could have easily masked each of those to closer net values of the HDR, but I prefer the look I rendered. IOW, both of the elements have enough detail at opposite ends of the exposure spectrum to remain the primary elements, yet are better balanced by the overall image contrast while being framed by far more interesting and believable foliage and window siding -- if that makes sense.

Obviously we're now discussing artistic preferences, but IMO the above points account for the added "presence" and "depth" in my version. Again, and speaking as both artist and viewer, I don't happen to like to false look rendered in many HDR comps -- and the above falls into that category, at least to my eye...

My .02 only and respect that YMMV,

Jack_Flesher

March 14th, 2009 03:37 PM

Update note -- the files as the OP has listed them is NOT accurate, he's got them twisted. If you open them, you can see his labeled +1 is actually the -1; his 0 is actually the +1; and his -1 is actually the 0...

Asher Kelman

March 14th, 2009 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_Flesher
(Post 71946)

Update note -- the files as the OP has listed them is NOT accurate, he's got them twisted. If you open them, you can see his labeled +1 is actually the -1; his 0 is actually the +1; and his -1 is actually the 0...

Jack,

I completely agree with you on you attitude to HDR. But with your background in film, I of course expect that! As far as reality of the picture, the leaves make or break the photograph. That's the anchor. If one can't imagine the springiness of the leaves as 3D objects and they seem flat as in the HDR version, then the window open and closed portions are not important.

Now that you have brought a lot of life to the image, I'm not sure that the image wouldn't get tweaked by you as I suggested if this was being printed for a gallery. I depends how that appears. On my laptop I can't see the interior but hey, that just this screen, perhaps.

I do take note of your appreciation of the Nikon file. That's good to know!

Thank you Jack for your fine contribution. I do like your version so much more than my pitiful example. Yours does have a lot of depth and detail and mine seems so flat, without any. I will go back and try again.

I first had to look up C1 because I did not know what that was. I do not have it but with your good description of what you did, I have some different things to try, perhaps in Lightroom and then CS4, to see if I can get a better outcome. I used initially the channel mixer in CS4 changing to monochrome and then adjusting the color sliders. That was about as silly as just desaturating completely. I will try again.

Will anyone else try this?

Oh yes...I am sorry that in my haste to upload the originals, I seem to have mislabeled them as to their proper EV. My mistake.

James Newman

Jack_Flesher

March 15th, 2009 10:40 AM

James,

Sorry, C1 = Capture One processing software and I prefer it for it's UI and excellent quality conversions for every camera's raw file I've run through it.

Try this in LR:

1) Set color balance to a good neutral -- try droppering the curtains in the upper window, or just dial in 5000/ +3 as a respectable starting point.

2) Adjust exposure (on the actual 0 image which is your first) to pump the shadow in the dark window -- try adding about 30%. Unfortunately this is the big disadvantage to LR, it cannot pull shadows like C1, so I suspect you might not get much brick detail from it.